Hum. Reprod. Advance Access originally published online on January 27, 2005
Human Reproduction 2005 20(3):810-819; doi:10.1093/humrep/deh703
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Human Reproduction Vol. 20 No. 3 © The Author 2005; all rights reserved
School-aged children of donor insemination: a study of parents' disclosure patterns
1 Family and Child Psychology Research Centre, City University, Northampton Square, London, EC1V 0HB, 3 Assisted Conception Unit, King's College Hospital, London, SE5 9RS, UK and 2 Department of Social Work, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand
4 To whom correspondence should be addressed. Email: e.lycett{at}city.ac.uk
BACKGROUND: A major concern in relation to donor insemination (DI) is whether children should be told about their genetic origins. This study compared the thoughts, feelings and experiences of DI parents who were inclined towards openness with those who were inclined towards non-disclosure. METHODS: Forty-six families with a 4- to 8-year-old DI-conceived child were interviewed about their decision, their reasons and subsequent concerns regarding disclosure. RESULTS: Thirty-nine percent of parents were inclined towards disclosure whilst the remaining 61% were not. The two main reasons for favouring disclosure were to avoid accidental discovery and a desire for openness. Non-disclosing parents felt that there was no reason to tell and wished to protect family members. The children who had been told reacted with either curiosity or disinterest. CONCLUSIONS: In spite of donor anonymity, parents who were intending to tell their child in the future had optimistic expectations of their child's reaction. Parents who had already told their child generally described the telling experience as a positive one.
Key words: children/disclosure/donor insemination
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  W. Kramer, J. Schneider, and N. Schultz US oocyte donors: a retrospective study of medical and psychosocial issues Hum. Reprod., December 1, 2009; 24(12): 3144 - 3149. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
V. Jadva, T. Freeman, W. Kramer, and S. Golombok The experiences of adolescents and adults conceived by sperm donation: comparisons by age of disclosure and family type Hum. Reprod., August 1, 2009; 24(8): 1909 - 1919. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
K. Daniels, W. Gillett, and V. Grace Parental information sharing with donor insemination conceived offspring: a follow-up study Hum. Reprod., May 1, 2009; 24(5): 1099 - 1105. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
T. Freeman, V. Jadva, W. Kramer, and S. Golombok Gamete donation: parents' experiences of searching for their child's donor siblings and donor Hum. Reprod., March 1, 2009; 24(3): 505 - 516. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
P. Thorn, T. Katzorke, and K. Daniels Semen donors in Germany: A study exploring motivations and attitudes Hum. Reprod., November 1, 2008; 23(11): 2415 - 2420. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
F. MacCallum and S. Golombok Embryo donation families: mothers' decisions regarding disclosure of donor conception Hum. Reprod., November 1, 2007; 22(11): 2888 - 2895. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. S. Paul and R. Berger Topic avoidance and family functioning in families conceived with donor insemination Hum. Reprod., September 1, 2007; 22(9): 2566 - 2571. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Kirkman, D. Rosenthal, and L. Johnson Families working it out: adolescents' views on communicating about donor-assisted conception Hum. Reprod., August 1, 2007; 22(8): 2318 - 2324. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. Lalos, C. Gottlieb, and O. Lalos Legislated right for donor-insemination children to know their genetic origin: a study of parental thinking Hum. Reprod., June 1, 2007; 22(6): 1759 - 1768. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
K. M. Godman, K. Sanders, M. Rosenberg, and P. Burton Potential sperm donors', recipients' and their partners' opinions towards the release of identifying information in Western Australia Hum. Reprod., November 1, 2006; 21(11): 3022 - 3026. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
P.M.W. Janssens, A.H.M. Simons, R.J. van Kooij, E. Blokzijl, and G.A.J. Dunselman A new Dutch Law regulating provision of identifying information of donors to offspring: background, content and impact Hum. Reprod., April 1, 2006; 21(4): 852 - 856. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 O. van den Akker A review of family donor constructs: Current research and future directions Hum. Reprod. Update, March 1, 2006; 12(2): 91 - 101. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 L J Fisher-Jeffes, I Banerjee, and A G Sutcliffe Parents' concerns regarding their ART children Reproduction, February 1, 2006; 131(2): 389 - 394. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|